<<<-- Originally posted by Carlos E. Martinez : <<<-- Originally posted by Asa Phelps : Hello everybody,
anyone had a chance to use this kind of LCD monitor?
Is focus pulling friendly with its 640x480 pixels? Whatabout colors? Seems more pro than Panasonic 7" LCD (and double priced, too)
-->>>

Yes, it's very expensive. It's almost three times the Panasonic 7".

For that kind of money it might be better to go for a CRT type, which will provide more contrast and probably better resolution if you ever go the HDV way.

There two other brands, Xenarc and Lilliput, that make 640 x 480 monitors, like the LMD650, and are much less costly. But I can't find any dealers or reps in NY or Florida to go have a try. You shouldn't buy a tripod or a monitor without actually trying them thoroughly.

There seems to be a shop (not a rep) in Canal Street that stocks Xenarc, which I should try when I go there in February, taking the GS400 with me.

On the Lilliput, a forum member found the image to be too soft. But there seem to be not that many members worried about this problem, as no one acknowledged my questions over monitors. LCD/TFT monitors deserve a second look. In my opinion a larger size LCD screen can help a lot in achieving better cinematography, as long as resolution and contrast are reasonably good.

Another brand you should try, probably even better than the Sony and more affordable, is the Boland monitor line.

This is just to correct some of the discussions I've seen on the forum about the Lilliput 7" monitor. I took some time looking into this and verifying all the facts before posting. Because if what I was reading was true, I definitely wanted to add these monitors to our product list. Unfortunately... it was not.
None of the Lilliput 7" monitors have close to a million pixels. The highest they have is 384,000. When they give the RGB at 1.1 million they are talking about dots. Three red, green and blue dots equal one pixel. Any company saying 1.1 million pixels RGB is trying to mislead the consumer as to the true resolution of the monitor by listing dots as pixels.
Unfortunately I am beginning to see an alarming trend develop. Even large corporations (like Panasonic) are beginning to use this listing in order to not have their product look inferior to their competitors. It does not mean that there is any better resolution... it is way of mis-representiong itself as something it is not.
By the way, we compared the top of the line Lilliput 7" to the Panasonic for 3 days straight. The Lilliput does look soft.

Hello guys - On the lilliputs, they have a number of different models. But 2, which are true vga quality , one 7" and one 8". If you go to diyaudio.com, then to the video forum , you'll find many people using these high res lilliputs to make their own lcd projectors. The 7" is a 15:9 720x480 and the 8" is a 4x3 640x480. If they had a million pixels , then they would be hd wouldn't they ? However the one 7" I've seen , wasn't soft at all and for $250 is a bargain. They also have a touchscreen you can add for another hundred that allows you to use it as a monitor, for example , in your car or maybe with the new mini mac ! I believe that res is a perfect match for dv , however falls short for hdv. The problem is , they are 12volt , which means you would have to rig up a battery , probably a belt. They also come with an ac/dc adapter. I'm thinking of getting one anyway just because they were so cheap. thanks - Kurth

You are quite right on that observation you made on manufacturers using the term "dot" instead of pixel. Quite confusing.

Also note that Lilliput has different types, only one (619GL-70NP) being 800 x 480, which would be 384.000. I say this because in dots they use a different number (2400 x 480). Panasonic states the 7WMS1 to be 336,960 pixels. So was the Lilliput you tested above mentioned model?

Kurth,

Rob's comparative test is very important. If the model he tested is the 619GL-70NP, then there's no higher resolution from Lilliput. Their bigger screen model is also interesting. But none of these should be bought without testing them.

There's a DC-DC booster, which can let you use your regular 7.4v DV batteries and boosts that voltage to 12v.

We did not test the 619GL-70NP.
The model number we tested was the 718GL-70TV. according to our customer this monitor was listed as 1.152 million pixels but only 600x480 (huh?). The image still looked a little soft when compared to the Panasonic.

We currently have a 619GL-70NP regular and touchscreen model on order from the manufacturer. They tell us that this monitor is 800x480 and has their best picture. The XVGA is curious to me since it offers RCA inputs. I can't wait to see how they do the conversion, or if it comes through in a different format. If that is the case, then the the only way to get the 800x600 resoulution will be through an VGA connection.

Another thing that is bothering me is the 16:9 only format. I am hoping that if this monitor lives up to the hype we will be able to modify the control panel to accept a 4:3 and 16:9 signal.

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob DuBree :
We did not test the 619GL-70NP.
The model number we tested was the 718GL-70TV. according to our customer this monitor was listed as 1.152 million pixels but only 600x480 (huh?). The image still looked a little soft when compared to the Panasonic.

We currently have a 619GL-70NP regular and touchscreen model on order from the manufacturer. They tell us that this monitor is 800x480 and has their best picture. The XVGA is curious to me since it offers RCA inputs. I can't wait to see how they do the conversion, or if it comes through in a different format. If that is the case, then the the only way to get the 800x600 resoulution will be through an VGA connection.

Another thing that is bothering me is the 16:9 only format. I am hoping that if this monitor lives up to the hype we will be able to modify the control panel to accept a 4:3 and 16:9 signal.
-->>>

You raise very good points. One complaint I read about the Lilliput was that it did not switch between 4:3 and 16:9, that is in this case show black stripes on the sides for the former. Maybe this person didn't know how to do it? Unlikely.

I am not sure if RCA inputs can handle 840 x 480 resolution, but it may not. There should be an S video input, though they say it is S-video compatible (whatever that means). Having a rear view photo would help.

It's quite likely full resolution is only available through VGA input, which we can't use for video.

If the VGA doesn't have some kind of conversion then the 800x480 will mean nothing to someone using it as a video monitor.

According to the manufacturer it doesn't have a 4:3 mode it's strictly 16:9. Why anyone would manufacture a widescreen only monitor with a VGA and s-video Input is beyond me? The majority of media for those types of connections is standard format (4:3).
However if we can find a controller board to power this unit that will allow both formats, then we should have a more cost efficient alternative to the Panasonic. It just depends on what kind of picture we get when we plug it into video.

As anyone will tell you, in this business, it's all about getting the best equipment for the lowest price. Once we test out the possibilities, I'll be posting again to let everyone know what we found.

What information do you have available for these Xenarc's that everyone's talking about?

What information do you have available for these Xenarc's that everyone's talking about?

-->>>

Perhaps not everyone is talking about. I have read only a very few mentioning them. And I am probably the one you read more on asking for who's tried them. Until now I couldn't get anyone to acknowledge that.

In February I will go to NY to buy video stuff, and I am planning to look for them there.

Boland is another brand which apparently is very good, though almost as expensive as the Sony. That is a brand a friend of mine tried and is very good. If they were cheaper I would probably go for them.